Oddly enough, this line of thought started with...Chris Christie! A friend of mine and I were trying to analyze Chris Christie's staying power in his 2016 run for he White House. Rhetorically, he had a few flourishes in the last debate, but on substance...not so much. And then it occurred to me, that a lot of what attracted people to Christie is what attracts them to Trump!
Remember what brought Christie to the national forefront? In 2010, in a series of town meetings, he stood up to the teachers' union, making them look greedy for demanding raises and refusing to pay a minimal 1.5% contribution to their healthcare costs, during hard economic times. He also accused the union of making "stupid" statements and told a number of people to sit down and shut up in public meetings if they didn't want to be civil.

It appeared that Governor Christie had a spine, was capable of standing up to the union and teachers who are only in it "for the children"and could speak his mind boldly, without fear of retribution. He acted in a very atypical way for politicians. Politicians do not tell people to "shut up". Politicians tell people what they want to hear, but they are not rude to them, because there will be another race down the line, and they don't want to be perceived as mean or rude. There's always another race and they have something to lose. That's one of the things people liked about Christie. He'd tell it like it is and let the chips fall where they may.
That's one of the things you can do if you're fearless and are willing to accept the consequences, or you're term limited out and there are no more offices to run for, or...if you're independently wealthy and are not dependent on political office to maintain your livelihood.

Which got me to thinking, and here, some of our less enlightened brethren might accuse me of succumbing to conspiracy theories, but consider, a lot of the candidates who ran and lost in '08, ran again in '12. A lot of the candidates who ran and lost in '12 are running this year. Pays to keep your options open, don'tcha know? But, what is the downside for a Donald Trump? Trump was the epitome of liberal values and causes not that long ago, before he supposedly became a conservative. But what if he's just telling people what they want to hear? He hasn't spent years toiling in the fields of conservatism after his conversion, like Reagan did. How can anyone know for sure that the conservatism he suddenly professes is genuine and not simply tailor for sound bites?

Trump is very light on specifics other than, he's going to build a wall, make Mexico pay for it and "make America great again". When he's asked questions about foreign policy that he does not know the answer to, he blusters that he will surround himself with people who do know, and that he will know more than anyone come inauguration day. And I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.

His political philosophy tends to be pragmatic rather than principled. After all, he's the "art of the deal" guy. Unfortunately, his deals seem to focus on the ends justifying the means. He wastes his time bragging about himself, denigrating his opponents and speaking in the vaguest of cliches.

And there are those, myself included who wonder about how genuine his conservatism is. Like Romney's "severe conservatism", Obama's "corpseman", we add Trump's quote from "Two Corinthians", as someone who may know the words but never heard the music.

Speaking of clones, what would you think of a candidate with very little political history, one who talks a good fight and tells people what they want to hear. A sort of "blank slate" that people could project all of their hope onto. Donald Trump? Or Barack Obama in 2008? (Or both??) It seems that conservatives are doing to Trump what liberals and moderates did to Obama in '08, projecting their ideal candidate onto a candidate promising solutions to all their problems and falling in love with their projection.

So, if Donald Trump, independently wealthy businessman, turns out to be not quite the campaigner in the general election, if he were to subtly throw the debates, turn out to be less than the conservative stalwart he claimed himself to be, what are you going to do to him? Not vote for him in four years? He won't be running for anything. Not watch his TV show or stay in his hotels? Most of us aren't doing that now. And if in January of 2017, developer Donald Trump were to have a new friend in the White House, wouldn't that be the art of making the ultimate deal??

For those of you who have become Trump's true believers: on what basis other than his rhetorical bombast, do you know that you can trust what he says? And even if he is genuine, he has a record of saying whatever pops into his head, no matter how intemperate. Is that the quality we look for in a president?

Our country has suffered for the last eight years because a guy who talked a good fight made a lot of promises and either couldn't or wouldn't deliver on them. The country cannot afford another.

13 comments:

Blind hatred of Trump reveals an incredibly naive view of how politics works. The country has suffered for the last 8 years because they elected a lifelong Marxist. While you fling your feces at Trump out of some sick desperate need for him to fail, you miss the forest for the trees. Was Bob Dole a "conservative"? Mitt Romney? Did you devote your life to tearing them down as well?

I am always amused at how little thinking goes into the comments of those who say I 'hate" Trump. I don't hate Trump. I just love my country more.

Blind? You make me laugh! I could catalog the better part of a hundred reasons NOT to have Donald Trump in the highest office in the land. Is this projection on your part, because you can't see them? I've sat through the last two presidential elections where the best and most conservative candidate was not the nominee. I don't intend to see it happen again. If instead of flinging your own feces (your projection is once again duly noted), you might try actually arguing the issues and the facts, unless you have none, in which case you are the perfect Trump supporter! Trump talks a good fight, but he's all hat and no cattle. And if Trump were to run against Hillary, she would have a thousand sound bites of Donald saying what a great candidate she is and of him flip flopping on every issue of importance to conservatives. Will I hold my nose and vote for Trump if he's the nominee? Yes. But I really don't want to relive the last eight years.

I grew the hell up. Isn't it time you did the same? Is really is much easier to accuse someone of "hating" Trump than to actually deal with their arguments. Must be why so many people have falsely accused me of "hating" Obama. It doesn't require any thought.

Your defense mechanisms are pretty lame. Screaming at the wind won't make it subside. Your fantasies don't change the world you live in. Trump is winning. You don't like that Trump is winning so you throw a tantrum. You've proven you're immune to reason which makes you useless as a voter and as an individual.

By the way, you tell a bald faced lie when you accuse Trump of running as a conservative. He never has. Change your diaper and pay attention to something other than your own fantasies. The democrat party will nominate a Communist in the next few months. If you don't realize what a big deal that is, you don't belong in this country.

"Bald faced lie" I never called Trump a conservative. You mean when Trump compares himself to Reagan?"Trump defends himself: I'm a conservative"http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/donald-trump-im-a-conservative-jeb-bush-121554

You missed it? Your loss. Bob Dole was before my time as a blogger, but I have over ten thousand articles dating back to 2008 on my blog, many of them critical of both McCain and Romney in the primaries. Your ignorance of their existence does not an argument make.

Now toddle off and grease the training wheels on your trike. After all, if three is good, five is better!

BTW, 'the Democrats are nominating a Communist' is not a defense of Trump's policies, either. No cigar.

Name one of Trump's "policies" you find objectionable and then get back to us here on earth. You aren't making a serious argument. You're striking a pose. I find it sad that you're this shallow. I thought you could think.

Try using eminent domain to seize private property for private rather than public gain. Can you say "Kelo"? You do know the next president will be nominating Supreme Court justices, don't you? Be nice if the next president follows his oath to uphold the Constitution. And try making one freaking comment without an ad hominem, if you can. Your projection does not serve you well.

Holy freaking frog shit. Are you on dope? You accused him of running as a conservative. You've made the accusation several times. If you mean nothing you write, go ahead and say so and let us be done with it.

"When compiling sharp conservative thoughts and takes for my Morning Jolt newsletter late at night and early in the morning, I find myself coming back to Left Coast Rebel again and again." -Jim Geraghty, National Review"Hey Tim, I appreciate the kind email and the plug on your site. It’s rare that my first feedback isn’t hate mail from a disgruntled statist! You carry on too – we’ve got our work cut out for us." -Tad DeHaven, Cato Institute"Thanks so much for all YOU do for liberty and individual rights. I appreciate your strong voice for capitalism. We're changing the culture -- keep it up!" -Jonathan Hoenig, Fox News"Congrats Tim. You have arrived." -GatewayPundit"Before we sell California to China or go Lex Luther on the San Andreas Fault, let's be sure to save the Left Coast Rebel." -Barack Obama's Cousin, Milton R. Wolf, M.D.

"I like LCR because it seems like more thought goes into posts there than at many other blogs that focus more on horse-race politics." -Nate Nelson, United Liberty

Legal Ease

This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
The opinions expressed are those of the respected authors alone. Any material posted here is made available for educational and informative purposes, and as such constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C., section 107 of the US Copyright Law. The material on this blog is provided without profit for benign research and educational purposes.